We’re excited to share the results of the Fall LEGO® Review. In September, three LEGO CUUSOO projects entered the second quarterly review period for projects that successfully reach 10,000 supporters. These three projects—the Mars Science Laboratory Curiosity Rover, UCS Sandcrawler™, and Thinking with Portals!™—have been being considered for production by the LEGO Review Board.

It is with great pleasure we reveal that the next LEGO CUUSOO set will be the Mars Science Laboratory Curiosity Rover, based upon the LEGO CUUSOO project by Perijove.

This project rose to popularity in late summer 2012, when the real Mars Curiosity Rover approached and landed on the planet Mars in its historic mission. The model designer, LEGO CUUSOO user Perijove is a Mechanical Engineer who worked on the actual Curiosity rover at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Perijove writes that he built and submitted the rover to further the educational outreach of the Mars Curiosity rover’s incredible mission, and to encourage greater public support for space exploration.

The final product is still in development. Exact pricing and availability is still being determined, so stay tuned for an update on when you can buy your own Mars Science Laboratory Curiosity Rover in the coming months.

Why wouldn't they pick the Portal one? They would definitely get more money from that. First Shaun of the Dead, Then the Firefly ship, and now this? Very disappointing results, anyone can make a Rover, but Portal would be more unique with more Minifigs.

Why bother even putting the Sandcrawler in with the rest if Star Wars is not eligible in the first place? There should be a big disclaimer page that lists specific companies, themes, and ideas that are not OK. Or have an employee actually looking through the Cuusoo website and anything with over 1k votes that would automatically get turned down gets their counter disabled? I feel like they allow some projects to either get our hopes up, or to make us think the whole Cuusoo thing is not a waste of time. I also wonder if the Wild West town that did not make it gave Lego the idea to snag the Lone Ranger and not have to give credit to that persons idea. Yes I know this is a pessimistic attitude, but I wonder how many ideas Lego is skimming from there and plan on later calling it their own with a few tweaks?

Anyway, the rover is not all that bad, but it was obvious that would be the one to get picked of the 3. I feel like unless the set is a one off, small-ish, unique kind of thing it is not even worth bothering to vote for. Chances are you will never see a full themed bunch of sets, nearly anything that is already licensed that is not based off a movie, or any project that would require more than say 3k pieces.

JovAwesome wrote::facepalm: Why wouldn't they pick the Portal one? They would definitely get more money from that. First Shaun of the Dead, Then the Firefly ship, and now this? Very disappointing results, anyone can make a Rover, but Portal would be more unique with more Minifigs.

Actually, if you read the blog post:

Cuusoo blog wrote:As of today, the test results are not yet in; we’re still looking into the possibility of releasing a set based on the Thinking with Portals! Project. Once we have a decision, we’ll share it with you here.

I'm glad that the UCS Sandcrawler didn't get made. The original was quasi-UCS in the first place (as it was a originally a prototype when they were creating the initial SW range and saw it as too big and too focused on collectors to release, that changed when they saw that adults were a key market).

And how big do you want to go? The original sandcrawler was large, this would just be too big.

I just want to know what's up with the DeLorean. Where my DeLorean at Lego?

Flynn wrote:So...what's the point of having Star Wars sets in Cuusoo in the first place?

Yeah, given that explanation, shouldn't all the Star Wars projects be removed or "archived" or whatever? They pretty much just confirmed that any further Star Wars-themed project that achieved support would be killed, so there's effectively no reason to continue to have such projects.

Wait, so they can't do sets based on licenses they don't own, and they can't do sets on licenses they do own? I would think it would be easier to do something they already have? So if i did a batman set, would it even stand a chance?

I just hope they make Portal. That's my personal favorite of the three. I''m guessing they're still trying to get the license.On the SW topic, my personal hope is that, if it's true that they can't make SW projects in Cuusoo, they will at least consider those that reach 10,000 for the normal non-Cuusoo SW theme.

darth_fett wrote:Wait, so they can't do sets based on licenses they don't own, and they can't do sets on licenses they do own? I would think it would be easier to do something they already have? So if i did a batman set, would it even stand a chance?

They just did BttF. Or rather they are doing it. So they obviously can do new licenses. As far as current licenses, it is yet to be seen if this qualifies for all licenses or just for Star Wars.

wyldjedi wrote:Why bother even putting the Sandcrawler in with the rest if Star Wars is not eligible in the first place? There should be a big disclaimer page that lists specific companies, themes, and ideas that are not OK. Or have an employee actually looking through the Cuusoo website and anything with over 1k votes that would automatically get turned down gets their counter disabled?

I agree with this. SW sets are part of a long process that involves a design team and also getting approval from Lucas/Disney. They're not going to skip over this process by some fan vote.

wyldjedi wrote:I also wonder if the Wild West town that did not make it gave Lego the idea to snag the Lone Ranger and not have to give credit to that persons idea.

Here I think you're very wrong. Those license agreements are a long time in the making. I'm sure they entered into negotiations about that long before the WW town was a blip on the Cuusoo radar.

wyldjedi wrote:Yes I know this is a pessimistic attitude, but I wonder how many ideas Lego is skimming from there and plan on later calling it their own with a few tweaks?

I do think this is the big problem with any material on Cuusoo that is not completely out of the builder's head. If I post a MOC of an X-Wing, that's not my idea, it's George Lucas'. LEGO is going to release a new X-Wing every couple of years anyway, if history is any guide, so if they don't copy my model brick for brick, there's no way to say that the X-Wing is based on my Cuusoo proposal, or just based on the ongoing SW license. Or there's the Batman Tumbler that got 10,000 votes - LEGO has already released a couple of Tumbler sets, and will probably release others in the future if the Batman license continues, regardless of Cuusoo. But it gets worse - it's not just existing licenses. Take, for instance, the Leaning Tower of Pisa. There's a LToP with 3600 votes. But again, that's not the builder's idea, it's Bonanno Pisano's (thanks, Wikipedia). And now LEGO just released a LToP in the Architecture line. But was it based on Cuusoo? I'd say it's pretty clearly not, since the design is very different, and it's a pretty obviously recognizable site in world architecture. They really should clarify the rules even more about what is or is not a viable Cuusoo idea.